Trained to Kill? A Generation Gap

December 27th, 2004 - by admin

Chris Floyd / Christianity Today – 2004-12-27 21:15:35

America calls its soldiers who fought in World War II “the greatest generation.” They are hymned by Hollywood, celebrated by publishers and politicians, hailed at every turn. And for their troubled descendants, whose military misadventures stretch from My Lai to Abu Ghraib, the clean-limbed victors of the “last good war” do indeed shine out like heroes from a lost golden age.

Yet despite the vast tonnage of celluloid and printer’s ink devoted to their praise, what is perhaps the truest, highest measure of their worth has been almost universally neglected. And what is this hidden glory, which does more honor to the people of the United States than every single military action ordered by their corruption-riddled leaders during the past 50 years?

It’s the fact that in the midst of history’s most vicious, all-devouring, inhuman war, only about 15 percent of American soldiers on the battlefield actually tried to kill anyone.

Vast Majority of WWII Soldiers Avoided Killing
In-depth studies by the US Army after the war showed that between 80 to 85 percent of the greatest generation never fired their weapons at an exposed enemy in combat, military psychologist Lt. Colonel Dave Grossman reports in Christianity Today.

Many times they had the chance, but could not bring themselves to do it. They either withheld their fire altogether or else shot into the air, to the side, anywhere but at the fellow human beings — their blood kin in biology, mind and mortality — facing them across the line.

This reticence is even more remarkable given the incessant demonization of the enemy by the top brass, especially in the Pacific, where the Japanese — soldiers and civilians — were routinely portrayed by military propaganda as simian, sub-human creatures fit only for extermination.

Yet even with official license given to the most virulent prejudice, even with the sanction of a just cause (self-defense against aggression), even with the incitements of mortal fear, of grief and anger over slain comrades, even with all the moral chaos endemic to warfare, American soldiers killed only with the greatest reluctance, in the direst extremity.

These were not “warriors,” bloodthirsty automatons with stripped-down brains and cauterized souls, slavering in Pavlovian fury at the bell-clap of command.

No, they were real men, willing, as Grossman notes, to stand up for a cause, even die for it, but not willing, in the end, to transgress the natural law (implanted by God or evolution, take your pick) that says: Do not kill your own kind — and every person of every race and nation is your own kind.

The Human Transcendence of Factory Hands and Farmboys
You would think that this apotheosis of human transcendence, achieved, in the best democratic fashion, by ordinary conscripts– farmboys and dock workers, factory hands, bank clerks, guitar players, teachers, cab drivers, hobos, card sharks, college men — would have been inscribed on plates of gold and fixed to the walls of the Capitol for all time, a blazon of national greatness.

Just think of it: Soldiers who hated to kill, who went out of their way to avoid killing or even firing their weapons, who held on to their essential humanity in the face of the severest provocations — and yet still won battle after battle, marching to victory in history’s greatest war.

But far from celebrating this example of genuine glory, the military brass were horrified at the low “firing rates” and anemic “kill ratios” of American soldiery.

They immediately set about trying to break the next generation of recruits of their natural resistance to slaughtering their own kind. Incorporating the latest techniques for psychological manipulation, new training programs were designed to brutalize the mind and habituate soldiers to the idea of killing automatically, by reflex, without the intervention of any of those “inefficient” scruples displayed by their illustrious predecessors.

Promoting Dehumanization
And it worked. The dehumanization process led to a steady rise in firing rates for US soldiers during subsequent conflicts. In the Korean War, 55 percent were ready to pump hot lead into enemy flesh.

And by the time the greatest generation’s own children took the field, in Vietnam, the willingness to slaughter was almost total: 95 percent of combat troops there fired with the intent to kill.

Today, in the quagmire of occupied Iraq, the brutalizing beat goes on. “Kill, kill, kill, kill, kill, it’s like it pounds in my brain,” a US soldier told the Los Angeles Times last month. Another shrugged at the sight of freshly killed bodies. “It doesn’t bother me at all,” he said. “I’m a warrior.”

Said a third: “We talk about killing all the time. I never used to be this way … but it’s like I can’t stop. I’m worried what I’ll be like when I get home.” A few military officials are beginning to worry too, noting the high rates of suicide, mental damage and emotional torment among combat veterans.

But the warlords of the White House — notorious battlefield shirkers who prefer to do their killing by remote control — have little regard for the cannon fodder they churn through in their quest for dominance and loot.

“Training’s intent is to re-create battle, to make it an automatic behavior among soldiers,” says Colonel Thomas Burke, Pentagon director of mental health policy. Any efforts to mitigate the moral schizophrenia induced by this training would undermine “effectiveness in battle,” he adds.

Yet strangely enough, this “warrior ethos” has singularly failed to produce the kind of lasting victories won by those 15-percenters of yore. Could it be that the systematic degradation of natural morality and common human feeling — especially in the service of dubious ends — is not actually the best way to achieve national greatness?

• Enemy Contact. Kill ’em, Kill ’em, Los Angeles Times, July 18, 2004

• Trained to Kill, Christianity Today, Aug. 10, 1998.

Posted in accordance with Title 17, US Code, for noncommercial, educational purposes.